Premium
Effect of mismatching abutments on implants with wider platforms – an experimental study in dogs
Author(s) -
Baffone Gabriele M.,
Botticelli Daniele,
Canullo Luigi,
Scala Alessandro,
Beolchini Marco,
Lang Niklaus P.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02320.x
Subject(s) - implant , soft tissue , molar , dentistry , buccal administration , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , abutment , medicine , coronal plane , osseointegration , orthodontics , alveolar crest , dental alveolus , anatomy , surgery , biology , botany , genus , civil engineering , engineering
Aim To evaluate the effect of mismatching abutments on implants with a wider platform on the peri‐implant hard tissue remodeling and the soft tissue dimensions. Material and methods Mandibular premolars and first molars of six Labrador dogs were extracted bilaterally. After 3 months of healing, one tapered implant was installed on each side of the mandibular molar region with the implant shoulder placed at the level of the buccal alveolar bony crest. On the right side of the mandible, an abutment of reduced diameter in relation to the platform of the implant was used, creating a mismatch of 0.85 mm (test), whereas an abutment of the same diameter of the implant platform was affixed in the left side of the mandible (control). The flaps were sutured to allow a non‐submerged healing. After 4 months, the animals were sacrificed and ground sections were obtained for histometric assessment. Results All implants were completely osseo‐integrated. Bone levels were superior at the test than at the control sites. However, statistically significant differences were found only at the buccal and proximal aspects. The soft tissue vertical dimension was higher at the control compared with the test sites. However, statistically significant differences were demonstrated only at the buccal aspects. Conclusions A mismatch of 0.85 mm between the implant and the abutment yielded more coronal levels of bone‐to‐implant contact and a reduced height of the peri‐implant soft tissue (biologic width), especially at the buccal aspect, if the implant shoulder was placed flush with the level of the buccal alveolar bony crest.